Topic: Removing Reputation & Proof

[Sixth]

Hello! I'm making this thread due to an influx of staff removing reputation that they deem invalid in mass amounts from people. I'd like to start off by saying that I am not against staff removing reputation such as, "Vouch, cool dude" or "Nice guy recommended dealing with him." What I am against, is removing reputation that was given from a banned member and the removal of reputation from members who didn't give valid proof.

I recall Justis once saying something along the lines of reputation from banned members "is not valid." This was in response to a thread about deleting negative reputation from a banned member. I agree with this as a negative opinion from someone banned doesn't matter because they clearly didn't follow the rules, yet removing positive reputation does not make sense. For example, the user RTG was banned for exiting scamming, yet prior to this he had completed many successful deals. If he legitimately sold something like a MC account or Bitcoin to a user and the deal went well, then why does the user who bought the item not get credit for it being successful transaction? Again, if the banned member left a positive reputation that isn't high quality for reputation, then I'm for removing it. It just doesn't makes sense to take away reputation from a user who has done a successful deal.

Next, removing reputation due to it not having sufficient proof should not be removed. While I am not the biggest fan of having to upload a file every time I add reputation, it does add another layer reputation by proving it was valid. The way I believe this should be fixed is by adding a rule that has 3-5 warning points as a punishment for not providing sufficient proof. If a user doesn't do so, why should the user getting the reputation be punished? Should we have to beg for them to add proper proof? If staff enforces warning points instead of just removing the reputation, users will be forced to add valid proof or they will end up eventually getting banned.

Anyways, these are my thoughts on the current reputation situation. Feel free to leave your thoughts below.

EDIT: You should not be given warning points for reputations before this potential rule is enforced, rather after.

EDIT 2: I furthered my idea in a post below.

 

[t-rex]

yeah I think warning points is a better option than stuff like this

 

[Ally]

yeah I think warning points is a better option than stuff like this

The reason for those removals is because they never got updated to the new rep standards or rules. But they shouldn't have been deleted in bulk for you to see.

 

[Justis]

I’m in agreement with staff being harder on users not leaving valid evidence of their claims. Especially when it’s blatant. Verbal warnings should only be given when it’s apparent that the user very much did try to leave supporting evidence of every claim they made in their feedback.

However, I wholeheartedly disagree with your belief that positive feedback is in any way different from negative, when it comes to banned members.
Firstly, a negative feedback can just as easily be regarding something anyone might deem relevant, far more so than a positive one over a deal for a product worth two cents, so to say that the rating type makes it different is ludicrous.

In a dispute, or pending a report on a banned user’s feedback, the user who left the feedback is unable to provide supporting evidence for their claims, or any further cooperation. They are removed from our community. Moreover, the reputation system is here to gauge the community’s overall opinion of a user. Opinions change over time, and that’s why it’s so important that our users are able to edit or remove the feedback that they leave on a user. It’s not stuck that way forever. However, this doesn’t happen for banned users. Banned users, being removed from our community, are no longer able to update their feedback. Their opinions have no way of being properly represented anymore. They’re not a part of the system, not a part of the community, and neither should their feedback be.

 

[Clown]

did try to leave supporting evidence of every claim they made in their feedback.

How is that possible? I mean when i'm saying that someone is good builder should i attach their portfolio on the proof or if i say that someone is understanding and does fast transactions should i pop a stopwatch? That's a bit too much , enough proof should be the payment or something similar varying to the case

 

[Justis]

How is that possible? I mean when i'm saying that someone is good builder should i attach their portfolio on the proof or if i say that someone is understanding and does fast transactions should i pop a stopwatch? That's a bit too much , enough proof should be the payment or something similar varying to the case

An attachment with screenshots of their work would be sufficient evidence to support your claim that they’re a good builder, assuming that the builds in the screenshots could actually be considered decent if using reason.
As for the “does fast transactions” and being understanding. Surely, you could upload a screenshot or a gif of you displaying the brief and considerate conversation that they held with you over whatever platform it was on.

If you can’t provide evidence to back up a claim you’re making, then don’t make that claim.

This shouldn’t be surprising. It’s the same with Scam Reports. You want to be able to have proof of the details of the transaction. That’s why you should never do them over calls, and should either keep a proper record, or do them in a place that they can’t be erased.
If you can’t back up a claim, your claim isn’t worth anything.

 

[SUPAH]

An attachment with screenshots of their work would be sufficient evidence to support your claim that they’re a good builder, assuming that the builds in the screenshots could actually be considered decent if using reason.
As for the “does fast transactions” and being understanding. Surely, you could upload a screenshot or a gif of you displaying the brief and considerate conversation that they held with you over whatever platform it was on.

If you can’t provide evidence to back up a claim you’re making, then don’t make that claim.

This shouldn’t be surprising. It’s the same with Scam Reports. You want to be able to have proof of the details of the transaction. That’s why you should never do them over calls, and should either keep a proper record, or do them in a place that they can’t be erased.
If you can’t back up a claim, your claim isn’t worth anything.

This is the worst thing possible. Nobody likes the concept of targeting someone's rep when you well-righteously know the rep is real. Like t-rex said, warning points will suffice. Nobody likes this rule

 

[TellTale]

All of the reasoning for why the reputation system is setup in this manner is sound. My two cents however is that this is a market place, where people like myself deal daily with many users .. I'm a busy guy! I like to give people a high five for being a good sport and getting the deal done, but hey! I'm not about to take all that extra time to get proof just to give a reputation to someone, I just wouldn't have time for more important things, and so I simply don't.

Great system! .. for people who have free time.

 

[Zyger]

All of the reasoning for why the reputation system is setup in this manner is sound. My two cents however is that this is a market place, where people like myself deal daily with many users .. I'm a busy guy! I like to give people a high five for being a good sport and getting the deal done, but hey! I'm not about to take all that extra time to get proof just to give a reputation to someone, I just wouldn't have time for more important things, and so I simply don't.

Great system! .. for people who have free time.

It doesn't take that long to get proof. Usually the confirmation of the other party receiving whatever's being exchanged / provided is enough, and you can just take a screenshot of the conversation to prove it, which takes about 30 seconds tops.

 

[Sixth]

Update, reputation is being removed for not having proof even when it was BEFORE the update that added proof. Please tell me how that makes any sense what so ever. Basically all of my reputation can be removed if the person who added it doesn’t have proof or doesn’t responed. How am I supposed to have chat logs for reputation added a year ago? Was the staff team thinking when they made this?

I also believe that there should be punishment for mass reporting reputation for no reason.

 

[jxhdvn]

An attachment with screenshots of their work would be sufficient evidence to support your claim that they’re a good builder, assuming that the builds in the screenshots could actually be considered decent if using reason.
As for the “does fast transactions” and being understanding. Surely, you could upload a screenshot or a gif of you displaying the brief and considerate conversation that they held with you over whatever platform it was on.

If you can’t provide evidence to back up a claim you’re making, then don’t make that claim.

This shouldn’t be surprising. It’s the same with Scam Reports. You want to be able to have proof of the details of the transaction. That’s why you should never do them over calls, and should either keep a proper record, or do them in a place that they can’t be erased.
If you can’t back up a claim, your claim isn’t worth anything.

The issue is you’re removing people’s rep which was obtained before the update that added the requirement of proof. I can’t dig up proof from 2 years ago, people might not have the same info (discord, paypal, etc). By doing this you’ve made it so any random user can target you and report all of your reputation that you obtained just because say they do not like you. That’s not a good system.

 

[TellTale]

An attachment with screenshots of their work would be sufficient evidence to support your claim that they’re a good builder, assuming that the builds in the screenshots could actually be considered decent if using reason.
As for the “does fast transactions” and being understanding. Surely, you could upload a screenshot or a gif of you displaying the brief and considerate conversation that they held with you over whatever platform it was on.

If you can’t provide evidence to back up a claim you’re making, then don’t make that claim.

This shouldn’t be surprising. It’s the same with Scam Reports. You want to be able to have proof of the details of the transaction. That’s why you should never do them over calls, and should either keep a proper record, or do them in a place that they can’t be erased.
If you can’t back up a claim, your claim isn’t worth anything.

Might as well wipe the board clean. Just delete everyones reputation, or don't reputation from random users. Too many of us, myself included did most of our dealings before, and not after. Do you expect us to find proof for all this, 2 years, 3 years after it all?

It's almost like a huge stab in the back.

 

[Zirak]

Personally I think the reputation system should just be removed in general, since too many users profit from having too much of it, then either doing a big exit scam, or using their reputation to persuade users.

If the rep system is just removed, A, it fixes this problem. B, it will make the community actually dub creditable members instead of just basing it off their rep (Such as middleman trading, or selling/buying accounts/servers).

I heard that they were planning to remove the rep system, and at first I disagreed. but after reviewing the benefits vs the negatives, it did end up being for the good of the community.

Just my take on it.

 

[Sixth]

Bump.

 

[Orochimaru]

Next, removing reputation due to it not having sufficient proof should not be removed.

Fr I have I think now 5 DMS from Aelin or someone idek about it and its like MY DUDE 2 yrs ago pls nah

I just tell them to delete it now, I'm done wasting my time on that bullshit

 

[DarkKnights22]

The system atm is trash. So much effort I put into pestering my past clients to edit the rep by adding even more proof than what was originally put. It was annoying for both me, and my clients. +1 from me.

 

[Khafra]

bump

 

[Sixth]

Bump

 

[Mick]

I’m in agreement with staff being harder on users not leaving valid evidence of their claims. Especially when it’s blatant. Verbal warnings should only be given when it’s apparent that the user very much did try to leave supporting evidence of every claim they made in their feedback.

However, I wholeheartedly disagree with your belief that positive feedback is in any way different from negative, when it comes to banned members.
Firstly, a negative feedback can just as easily be regarding something anyone might deem relevant, far more so than a positive one over a deal for a product worth two cents, so to say that the rating type makes it different is ludicrous.

In a dispute, or pending a report on a banned user’s feedback, the user who left the feedback is unable to provide supporting evidence for their claims, or any further cooperation. They are removed from our community. Moreover, the reputation system is here to gauge the community’s overall opinion of a user. Opinions change over time, and that’s why it’s so important that our users are able to edit or remove the feedback that they leave on a user. It’s not stuck that way forever. However, this doesn’t happen for banned users. Banned users, being removed from our community, are no longer able to update their feedback. Their opinions have no way of being properly represented anymore. They’re not a part of the system, not a part of the community, and neither should their feedback be.

Denied, thanks for the suggestion